I agree. Let's stick to the fixed versioning scheme.
Thanks,
Raymond
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Mike Edwards" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 2:46 PM
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [2.x] OSGi version for Tuscany are 1.4?
Luciano Resende wrote:
On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 8:39 AM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
3) Do we need to adopt a version range or a fixed version for
Import-Package headers?
Initially a fixed version. As we get more confident we could look at
ranges
but I'm a little skeptical at the moment.
+1
My view, expressed in a previous discussion relating to OSGi, is that if
we are prepared to declare a range for 3rd party libraries, then we are
taking it upon ourselves to test that our code does indeed work with all
the versions of the 3rd party code that fit in the range. This is a
potentially large burden since the combinations of different versions of
different 3rd party packages rapidly becomes a very large number.
I'm not sure that this is going to work, so my inclination is to stick
with specific versions, unless we develop some kind of testing regime that
will allow for automated testing of the different versions.
Yours, Mike.
